DEFINING OUTCOMES IN A UN LEVEL YOUTH INCLUSION PROCESS

The evaluation presented in this report intends to trace outcomes of the process. In evaluation, an outcome is generally defined as the short-and medium-term change and effect of an output, strategy or intervention.11

The short- and medium-term outcomes of the youth inclusion strategy as identified through the evaluation can be categorised under two headings; Agenda and Access.12

Agenda level outcome

The agenda level outcomes can be defined as the effect of youth advocacy in the political agenda setting and policy conclusions of the process.

In S+50, the evaluation seeks to capture agenda level outcomes by asking the question; were recommendations influenced or based on the agenda of youth? The evaluator examines the motivation(s) lying behind the recommendations, to verify the outcome.

However, it is important to keep in mind that results would be short-term, strategic and nonbinding commitments. Any possible outcomes or effects would therefore have to be assessed after a longer period of time.

Access level outcome

The access level outcome can be defined as the change achieved by the measures taken in order to give youth access to the process.13

In S+50, the access outcomes of this evaluation are captured by asking the question: In what ways did the youth inclusion process provide more space and access to youth?

The evaluation seeks to identify changes in working methods, working culture, supportive measures created, priorities set, etc. Importantly, the outcomes that we can expect in a process such as S+50 most likely represent movements traced in comparison to a “base line”, as opposed to the arrival at a “final destination” or an “expected and desired situation”.

11 www.oecd.org/dac/results-development/what-are-results.htm

12 Casey (2014) categorises the different possible outcomes of advocacy into the levels; access, agenda, output, impact and structural. Casey, J. (2014). Understanding Advocacy: A Primer on the Policy Making Role of Nonprofit Organizations, p 11

13 Casey (2014) describes Access level outcome as “the voice of previously excluded stakeholders [in this case youth] now heard”.